BA 1837/2022
1
MHCC020099782022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1837 OF 2022
(CNR NO.MHCC02­009978­2022)
IN
C.R.NO.03 OF 2022
Ashif Salim Mulla alias Ashik
Aged about 22 years, Occ – Unemployed
Having address at, Flat No.1201,
Building No.1B, Versova Samarth
Darshan CHS Ltd, Near
Lokhandwala Circle,
Andheri – West, Mumbai – 400 053
And
Having Permanent address at
Village Madhab Pasha, Thana
Kalia, District – Narail
Bangladesh
….Applicant/Accused
Vs.
State of Maharashtra
Through Anti­Terrorism Squad
(ATS), Juhu Branch, having
address Andheri West,
Mumbai – 400 049
…. Respondent.

BA 1837/2022
2
Advocate Mr. Premal Krishnan a/w advocate Mr. Abhishek Thoke and
Advocate Mr. Prashant Bothre i/b Pan India Legal Service LLP for
applicant/accused
APP Mr. S.V.Keknis for State.

CORAM:
HH THE ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE
SMT.C.V.PATIL
(Court Room No.27)
DATE : 01st October, 2022.
ORDER
1.

The said application is filed by accused Ashif Salim Mulla alias
Ashik u/s. 439 of Cr.P.C. and requested for regular bail. The applicant
submitted that he has been falsely implicated. Actually the offence is
committed by Rupesh Chaudhari, Raju Shaikh and others but the applicant
is falsely implicated. The applicant has mentioned long story in the
application to show that how the main accused his sister was harassed by
Rupesh Chaudhari and Raju Shaikh. Actually his sister is victim at the
hands of two plus others. Though he has been falsely implicated. As per
statement of applicant Rupesh Chaudhari is husband of his sister. He has
managed for preparing false documents and he allowed his wife to bring
his relatives from Bangladesh. In short the applicant has given focus on the
statement that his sister is victim at the hands of Rupesh Chaudhari. He
has managed everything about passport, aadhar card etc., and therefore
instead of citing him as accused the police have cited him as witness. The
accused has submitted that Rupesh Chaudhari is accused. He has managed
everything. He has prepared false documents and on these grounds the
applicant is asking for bail. The applicant has further submitted that from
BA 1837/2022
3
the said wedlock with Rupesh Chaudhari one child is begotten to his sister.
With these grounds the applicant requested bail.
2.

APP/I.O. has filed reply at Exh.2. The I.O. has mentioned short
summary of the allegations and opposed bail application on the ground
that the accused is citizen of Bangladesh. He has illegally entered in India
and was staying in India. The said accused has prepared false/forged
aadhar card, pan card, school leaving certificate and on that basis he has
travel in India. The I.O. further objected that the accused is not Indian
citizen. He do not have any relative in India and in such circumstance if
the accused released then he would abscond from India and trial would be
held up.
3.

C.R.No.03/2022 is registered against this accused alongwith others
for the offence punishable u/s. 465, 466, 467, 468, 470, 420 r.w. 34 of the
IPC with Kalachowki police station. Now charge­sheet is filed, same is
pending before the Court which is bearing no.PW/434/2022. From the
offences alleged against accused it appears that all the offences are triable
by learned Magistrate. In the argument the advocate for accused submitted
that the said offence is neither punishable with death nor with
imprisonment for life. Therefore accused is entitled for bail. For granting
bail only question is material that the offence is non­bailable and nature of
offence is important. The question how much punishment is provided for
the offence is not material. Copy of charge­sheet produced on record. It
appears that charge­sheet is already filed which is pending before the
Court. The accused had given much emphasis to show that his sister is wife
BA 1837/2022
4
of Rupesh Chaudhari and the advocate of accused referred leave and
license agreement which is at page no.304 in the compilation. The said
agreement is prepared between Ruchi Ramesh Razdan and Rupesh
Prabhakar Chaudhari. The address is Flat no.1201, Building no.1B,
Versova, Andheri (W), Mumbai. The advocate of accused submitted that
accused is arrested from the same address. On perusal of copy of charge­
sheet it appears that the accused is arrested from the said address. The
report of the I.O. further disclose that the main accused has bring her two
relatives i.e. by name Payal and present applicant Ashif. In the statement
made by applicant in the application main accused has also admitted that
as per say of Rupesh Chaudhari for taking care of the child as well as her
care, she has bring her brother and sister­in­law i.e. Payal and Ashif. Ashif
is present applicant. In the application itself applicant admitted that he is
from Bangladesh. He has not obtained Indian citizenship but whatever
documents are prepared i.e. aadhar card, school leaving certificate etc., are
prepared by Rupesh Chaudhari and therefore he do not know how he has
prepared documents and therefore prima facie Rupesh Chaudhari is main
culprit in the commission of crime.
4.

For the sake of moment as per statement of applicant if we presume
that all forged documents are prepared at the instance of Rupesh
Chaudhari. But applicant himself know the fact that he is not Indian citizen
even his passport got prepared by Rupesh Chaudhari and he kept mum. In
action he travel from Bangladesh to India. When the said accused was not
having documents on which passport is prepared then how he has not
asked question to Rupesh how he has prepared documents. This shows
BA 1837/2022
5
prima facie involvement of accused in the commission of offence. This
observation is only for bail. He has allegations that Rupesh Chaudhari is
influential person therefore police have cited him as witness instead of
accused. In the compilation of charge­sheet the statement of Rupesh
Chaudhari is on record. From the statement of Rupesh Chaudhari it
appears that he is in acquaintance with this accused. Though prima facie it
appears that there is some substance in the contention of application. But
it is to be noted that anyone can cited as accused at the time of trial also.
Now though Rupesh Chaudhari is cited as witness but during trial real
facts would come on record. Thereafter also the Court can add someone if
he found involved in the commission of offence. However just police have
cited Rupesh Chaudhari as witness. The said accused is not entitled for
bail. On the contrary whether he is entitled for bail this fact needs to be
considered on merit. It is discussed in earlier para that prima facie there is
involvement of this accused. Therefore principle of parity is also not
applicable.
5.

The report of the I.O. disclosed that the main accused is
Bangladeshi. With the help of Indian citizen and Bangladeshi citizen she
used to migrate Bangladeshi into India illegally. She also used to prepare
forged documents of the Bangladesh citizen for their migration in India.
Considering allegations its nature is serious one. The said accused do not
have residence in India. Therefore if the accused released on bail during
pendency of trial then he would migrate to Bangladesh. Accordingly
following order is passed.

BA 1837/2022
6
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.1837/2022 is rejected
2.

Thus, Criminal Bail Application No.1837/2022 stands disposed of.

01/10/2022
Date of Dictation
: 01/10/2022
Date of Transcription : 03/10/2022
Date of signature
: 04/10/2022
(Smt.C.V.Patil)
Addl.Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Mumbai
BA 1837/2022
7
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
06/10/2022 11.00 a.m.

Mrs. M.S. Putta
Name of the Judge (With Court Room No.) HHJ Smt. C.V.Patil (CR 27)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
of
01/10/2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on
04/10/2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on
06/10/2022